Wow!! - Just got a Legal Demand & DMCA Notice??

[DomainMagnate]

lol good advice tony

are you allowed to disclose these two celebs' names?

 

[tonyfloyd]

thanks mike..

hhhmmm....his name starts with an "N" and her name starts with a "V"...

 

[jberryhill]

.if u are famous celebrities and u know the paparazzi track your every move....dont decide to get nasty in an outdoor pool!!!!.....do it indoors!...lol...

can anybody guess these 2 loser celebs?

Not that I would care, but I believe the term "loser" would more aptly befit someone with such an utter lack of a life, that he needs to hide and take pictures of a couple engaged in doing what couples do - activities which, if you find them to be "raunchy" or "nasty", I suggest you avoid.

Perhaps you believe it to be "nasty" because those are the only sorts of reviews you have gotten, but there are people who find sex to be enjoyable.

 

[tonyfloyd]

Hey John...I wish u would of posted earlier when I actually needed some legal guidance......anyways...glad to hear that u find sex enjoyable......no need to be a wiseguy...

 

[meetmydomains]

Hmmm... N & V... Iguess its not Pamela and Tommy Lee!

Then again, they would just want monetary rights wouldnt they?

 

[jberryhill]

I wish u would of posted earlier when I actually needed some legal guidance..

Ah, you qualify for my "double your money back" guarantee. If I am late to a thread on DNForum, then I refund twice what you paid me.

no need to be a wiseguy..

Need? With me, it is a compulsion. As stated here long ago, I reserve the right to be sarcastic in lieu of fees.

 

[tonyfloyd]

ah...ok...i must of missed that post.....

 

[jberryhill]

I am confused by what right the celebrity is claiming a copyright in the photograph.

A proper DMCA notification can only be sent by the copyright owner. The copyright in a photograph, in the first instance, belongs to the photographer. The photographer may be under contract to assign, or may later assign, the copyright to someone else. But I do not own a copyright in a photograph which someone has taken of me.

The celebrity may have a right of publicity, but that is not the same thing as a copyright, and cannot be the basis of a DMCA notification.

There is some general mythology about the purpose and effect of DMCA notifications. This procedure was provided in order to allow an "out" for webhosting companies, and to relieve them of copyright infringement liability if they follow the procedure - it's not about you at all.

The webhost can avoid liability if:

- They receive a DMCA notification (with the elements required by the DMCA);

- They notify you of the notification;

- They provide a time period for you to respond with your reasons why the notification is wrong or otherwise invalid

- If you do not respond, then the webhosting company takes it down

- If you do respond, the webhosting company does not have to judge who is right and who is wrong, and may leave the material up without incurring liability.

The basic idea is to provide a mechanism for copyright owners to have material taken down unless the poster of the material speaks up and claims a right to post the material. A lot of folks - webhosts included - do not fully understand that the material can stay up based on almost any response by the webhosting customer. Most of the time, the customer does not respond, and the material comes down.

In a situation such as this one, again, I would question the celebrity's claim to own a copyright in the photograph. However, that issue is only limited to responding to the DMCA notice, and not to other issues (such as the right of publicity/privacy) that they celebrity might raise apart from the copyright claim.

Happy now?

But personally, two people enjoying each other in whatever consensual way they see fit is their own business, and the photographers and the audience here have what I consider to be a serious personality disorder which requires professional help well beyond my area of expertise.

 

[tonyfloyd]

lol....thanks John!!....but this legal demand and DMCA notice that i got a few weeks back came from the lawyers representing these 2 celebrities.....i can forward you the e-mail if you'd like to look at...and tell me if i had any leg to stand on by keeping these photos up on my site....i never got one of these before ...so i took them down as they requested and notified them via e-mail that they were removed as they had also requested......thanks again!
Tony

 

[jberryhill]

i can forward you the e-mail if you'd like to look at..

Naw.... just send me the pictures.

 

[tonyfloyd]

lol.....i deleted the ones that first leaked out....and the "Hotter" ones that they scared everybody off from publishing were bought from OK magazine by the celebs for $400k to keep them off the shelves.....

 

[jberryhill]

the "Hotter" ones that they scared everybody off from publishing were bought from OK magazine by the celebs for $400k to keep them off the shelves..

Well then you appear to have your answer on the question of who owns the copyright in the photographs.